Originally Posted by
KelvinD
I think the OP should be given the benefit of the doubt. He has the benefit of knowing the area well and is familiar with all that goes on above him.
..and some of us have the benefit of regularly flying the Ockham hold and are familiar with the area- do we get given the benefit of being allowed to be slightly sceptical?
I have just looked at the historical track on Planefinder and this show the aircraft going round the Ockham stack 3 times. Cremeegg qutoed FR24 as showing 2 circuits. I neither know nor care which is accurate but it does seem to prove my point about relying on tracking sites to be 100% accurate.
Actually it doesn’t prove it, because Flight Radar shows the aircraft doing three times around the pattern, (the initial join plus two subsequent times around) so both sites seem to tie for accuracy in that department. Last time over OCK the aircraft then turns right onto whatever heading ATC will have wanted for downwind. I do understand the general point about the tracking sites “joining the dots” but in the case of the flight in question it would have to quite a fluke for the site to consistently“join the dots” in a manner that exactly replicates the published OCK procedure if it actually wasn’t doing so, and the height data consistently indicates the sort of levels you fly entering that hold, in the hold, and when you head off down wind...there is absolutely no hint of it ever being “at a much lower altitude than the norm”..anyhow be interesting if one of our tracking site gurus has any thoughts on this.
TBH one thing that does puzzle me is why the OP was certain right from the start of this thread that the aircraft they claim was involved here was the BA479....